> not necessarily the emotional mirroring aspect he's defined empathy to be.

The way the wikipedia article describes Bloom's definition is less generous than what you have here

> For Bloom, "[e]mpathy is the act of coming to experience the world as you think someone else does"[1]: 16

So for bloom it is not necessarily even accurately mirroring another's emotions, but only what you think there emotions are.

> Bloom also explores the neurological differences between feeling and understanding, which are central to demonstrating the limitations of empathy.

This seems to artificial separate empathy and understanding in a way that does not align with common usage and I would argue also makes for a less useful definition in that I would then need new words to describe what I currently use 'empathy' for.

Some would say you lack empathy if you want to force mentally ill people on the street to get treatment. Other people will say you lack empathy if you discount how they feel about the “illegal” bit in “illegal immigration” —- that is, we all obey laws we don’t agree with or take the risk we’ll get in trouble and people don’t like seeing other people do otherwise any more than I like seeing people jump the turnstile on the subway when I am paying the fare.

Understanding another person's perspective is not necessary to determine whether they are correct. Empathy can be important for fostering social harmony, but it's also true that it can obstruct clear thinking and slow progress.

It's not there to short circuit reasoning. It's there to short circuit self interested reasoning, which is both necessary for social cohesion and a vector of attack. The farther you are from a person the more likely it is to be the latter. You must have seen it a thousand times where someone plays the victim to take advantage of another person's empathy, right?

Empathy biases reasoning toward in-group cohesion, overriding dispassionate reasoning that could threaten group unity.

Empathy is not required for logical coherence. It exists to override what one might otherwise rationally conclude. Bias toward anyone’s relative perspective is unnecessary for logically coherent thought.

[edit]

Modeling someone’s cognition or experience is not empathy. Empathy is the emotional process of identifying with someone, not the cognitive act of modeling them.

A lot of companies I know have "kindness/empathy" in their value or even promote it as part of the company philosophy to the point it has already become a cliché (and so new companies explicitly avoid to put it explicitly)

I can say also a lot of DEI trainings were about being empathic to the minorities.

There is no end of examples. The first that comes to mind is the “Dear Colleague” letter around Title IX that drove colleges to replace evidence-based adjudication with deference to subjective claims and gutted due process on college campuses for over a decade.

Another is the push to eliminate standardized testing from admissions.

Or the “de-incarceration” efforts that reduce or remove jail time for extremely serious crimes.